The Culinary Union in Nevada released a statement criticizing Bernie Sanders supporters for having "viciously attacked the Culinary Union ... simply because our union has provided facts on what certain healthcare proposals might do to take away the system of care we have built over 8 decades."

As a blue Nevada showed in 2016, there's probably not a more important endorsement than the Culinary Union. Bernie supporters might have prevented their pick from getting it:

It’s truly amazing to me that people whose reaction to any dissent is “if they ain’t on board already, fuck em” seem so genuinely baffled at how electoral politics always seem to be stacked against them.

It demonstrates the uncompromising vision for America espoused by Sanders and his platform.

And you’re wrong re: establishment Democrats. Their material conditions would change more under a Sanders Presidency than a second term of Trump. They WILL pick a sure loser if it meant preserving the status quo.

(02-12-2020, 10:25 PM)Amos Wrote: The superdelegates would prefer Trump to Bernie, and they WILL spike this thing if given the chance.

This is just dumb.

Lifelong Democrats would prefer a Democrat run for President as a Democrat. Shocker!

(02-12-2020, 10:35 PM)Amos Wrote: That statement was meant to kneecap Bernie in NV. Coddling them would play into their strategy.

And telling people whose support you might need in the future (like in the general election), "Fuck you" is exactly why Superdelegates don't vote for Bernie!

This politics thing is more complicated than, "Anyone who doesn't BEND THE KNEE is the enemy".

Also, the whole "bending the knee" demand didn't work out so well for the last person most of us saw use it...

The whole “bend the knee” thing is stupid as if simply nominating Bernie is going to defeat Trump. Bernie is going to have just as difficult a time as any of the others. Especially because Bernie is relying on the most unreliable voting block out there.

I’d put the odds of them forgetting to vote because they had to finish a sick burn meme at 60/40.

"Every romantic comedy should just be called "Tryin' to Fuck" - Patton Oswalt

Quote:On paper, the Culinary Workers Union and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) look like a perfect match. The powerful Las Vegas-based local of Unite Here represents service workers throughout the city, making it one of the few places in the U.S. where housekeepers, busboys and cocktail waitresses can lead middle-class lives. Sanders is arguably the most pro-labor presidential candidate to wage a viable campaign in generations. The way the Culinary’s organizing muscle has lifted up the Strip’s most vulnerable workers could make for an entire Sanders stump speech.

But the Culinary has been making Sanders seem a little scary. According to the Nevada Independent, the union recently posted flyers inside employee areas of casinos and hotels warning that Sanders would end the Culinary’s health care program if elected, through his Medicare for All proposal. The message could potentially damage the front-runner in the upcoming Nevada caucuses on Feb. 22, since the union has tremendous reach through its 60,000 members and their families.

It might seem odd to undermine the candidate who’s been walking picket lines for decades and stumped for a $15 minimum wage before anyone else, but the Culinary’s warning to members on Medicare for All isn’t surprising. The union, which is made up mostly of women and Latino members, has built up a health care program that’s the envy not only of low-wage service workers but even well-paid professionals with run-of-the-mill employer coverage. It doesn’t want a single-payer plan like the one Sanders proposes to end the private insurance plan it has built through years of organizing, bargaining and striking.

Union officials would have their own reasons for wanting to keep the current system ― it is, after all, one of the sweetest benefits Culinary membership can offer. (Nevada is a right-to-work state, so unions there must constantly prove their value if the workers they represent are to choose to pay dues.) But plenty of rank-and-file members would share the same concern. When HuffPost was reporting on the Culinary for a 2018 profile of the union’s success, many workers pointed to their excellent health benefits as a point of pride.

A housekeeper at the Paris resort said that maintaining the current health care coverage was her top priority as the union headed into a new round of negotiations with the casinos. A cocktail server remarked: “My main thing through all this is my health insurance.”

It’s not hard to see why. The Culinary Health Fund is a multi-employer, nonprofit plan that all the employers under the union’s contracts chip into. The fund bills itself as the most generous in Southern Nevada. It provides mental, dental and prescription drug coverage to 139,000 workers and their relatives. The family coverage comes with no monthly premium for workers, unlike most people with plans through their employers. (Sanders’ Medicare for All plan, it’s worth noting, would come with no co-pays or deductibles as proposed.) A few years ago, the fund even built its own standalone health clinic for members, offering adult, pediatric and urgent care onsite. The fund also runs two pharmacies.

The Culinary is arguably the most powerful union local in the country, having organized all but a handful of casinos and hotels on the Strip, and it offers top-notch health care because that’s where it’s chosen to put so much of its leverage. In contract negotiations, wages and health care represent different pockets of the same coat, with employers willing to raise their total labor costs only so much. Culinary members have forgone pay increases in order to create and maintain their prize health plan.

To many labor activists, that itself is an argument for Medicare for All. If members had health care through single payer, they could pour all their resources into winning better pay and other benefits. What union wouldn’t love to take a messy and expensive issue like health care off the bargaining table for good? But from the Culinary’s perspective, Medicare for All could scrap a health plan their members like and replace it with something untested, with no refund on the capital they spent in the past to build it up.

Sanders himself has acknowledged the misgivings some unions might have with his health plan, and proposed a wrinkle after taking heat on the trail. The language he added over the summer would allow unions to renegotiate contracts with employers so that any savings from Medicare for All would be pumped into wage and pension increases. His centrist opponents pounced and accused him of backtracking and watering down his plan.

Unions are rarely in lockstep on any complicated issue, and Medicare for All is no different. While the Culinary might oppose single payer, other unions and labor leaders have come out in support of it. Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers has said she would much rather bargain over class sizes than health care. Sara Nelson of the Association of Flight Attendants has been an outspoken backer of single payer, as has National Nurses United, an ally of Sanders.

Rahm Emanuel, who left his chief of staff position under Obama because heavy midterm loses were expected in 2010, is warning that Democrats could lost state legislative seats if Sanders becomes the nominee.

Quote:Two former chairmen of the party’s House campaign arm — Steve Israel, who has endorsed Mr. Biden, and Rahm Emanuel, who is not backing any candidate — say the lawmakers are right to be concerned. Mr. Emanuel, the former mayor of Chicago, led Democrats to retake the House in 2006 using a playbook he called “metropolitan majority” — a “center-left” agenda aimed at uniting urban and suburban voters.

“Back in 2006, we created Red to Blue as a political entity,” Mr. Emanuel said, referring to a program Democrats made to help candidates flip Republican seats. “We never established or created ‘blue to deep blue.’ That’s not how you create majorities.”

He said governorships, the Senate and state legislatures — which govern redistricting and thus exert powerful influence over the political makeup of Congress — are also at stake.

“Every time we have won the White House, gained seats in the House and the Senate and the state capitals, we have run based on a model that has proved itself in presidential years, and off presidential years,” he said. “The question is: Do you want to take that playbook and throw it out?”

(02-12-2020, 10:56 PM)Amos Wrote: It demonstrates the uncompromising vision for America espoused by Sanders and his platform.

That's the philosophy of a child.

Telling potential allies that you don't want them unless they agree to everything you want is a great way to have no allies and get nothing done.

Quote:And you’re wrong re: establishment Democrats. Their material conditions would change more under a Sanders Presidency than a second term of Trump. They WILL pick a sure loser if it meant preserving the status quo.

Sorry to break it to you, but Democrats don't fear Sanders; many simply disagree with and/or dislike him.

What do you think Sanders is going to do, exactly? In the best-case scenario, the Dems control both houses of Congress. Even then, Sanders will need the support of nearly every Dem in the House and every single Democratic Senator to pass -anything-. He will need to rely on (most likely) Schumer and especially Pelosi to wrangle votes, and they'll do so by soiling Sanders' pure ideas until some version can actually pass.

Whatever policy you think terrifies Democrats will never pass Congress, so they don't fear it. If Sanders treats that as a reason to declare a chunk of the Dems in Congress his enemies, then he'll spend 4 years doing nothing.

Quote:At the height of the 2008 economic collapse, then-New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the elimination of a discriminatory housing practice known as “redlining” was responsible for instigating the meltdown.

“It all started back when there was a lot of pressure on banks to make loans to everyone,” Bloomberg, now a Democratic presidential candidate, said at a forum that was hosted by Georgetown University in September 2008. “Redlining, if you remember, was the term where banks took whole neighborhoods and said, ‘People in these neighborhoods are poor, they’re not going to be able to pay off their mortgages, tell your salesmen don’t go into those areas.’”

He continued: “And then Congress got involved -- local elected officials, as well -- and said, ‘Oh that’s not fair, these people should be able to get credit.’ And once you started pushing in that direction, banks started making more and more loans where the credit of the person buying the house wasn’t as good as you would like.”

Bloomberg, a billionaire who built a media and financial services empire before turning to electoral politics, was correct that the financial crisis was triggered in part by banks extending loans to borrowers who were ill-suited to repay them. But by attributing the meltdown to the elimination of redlining, a practice used by banks to discriminate against minority borrowers, Bloomberg appears to be blaming policies intended to bring equality to the housing market.

The term redlining comes from the “red lines” those in the financial industry would draw on a map to denote areas deemed ineligible for credit, frequently based on race.

“It’s been well documented that the 2008 crash was caused by unethical, predatory lending that deliberately targeted communities of color,” said Debra Gore-Mann, president and CEO of the Greenlining Institute, a nonprofit that works for racial and economic justice. “People of color were sold trick loans with exploding interest rates designed to push them into foreclosure. Our communities of color and low income communities were the victims of the crash, not the cause.”

Well for one thing, the left wing is going to clean house at the DNC. All the influence peddling that happens in the upper halls of power inside the Democratic Party will be turned on it's head. The gravy train will stop for a great many people inside the beltway, which is why you see people like Chris Matthews frantically suggest Sanders would bring about Communist Death Squads in Central Park. They will continue to milk the cow if Trump gets re-elected so of course they would prefer that outcome.

And to touch back on the Culinary Union for another moment. One union being able to scrape together healthcare for their membership is not itself an argument against Medicare for All. It's a non-starter. And that's presuming the statement is coming from a politically agnostic place, which it's not.

Well for one thing, the left wing is going to clean house at the DNC. All the influence peddling that happens in the upper halls of power inside the Democratic Party will be turned on it's head. The gravy train will stop for a great many people inside the beltway, which is why you see people like Chris Matthews frantically suggest Sanders would bring about Communist Death Squads in Central Park. They will continue to milk the cow if Trump gets re-elected so of course they would prefer that outcome.

And to touch back on the Culinary Union for another moment. One union being able to scrape together healthcare for their membership is not itself an argument against Medicare for All. It's a non-starter. And that's presuming the statement is coming from a politically agnostic place, which it's not.

"These guys are pros, Michael. They're gonna push the tension 'till the last possible moment before they strip."

Well for one thing, the left wing is going to clean house at the DNC. All the influence peddling that happens in the upper halls of power inside the Democratic Party will be turned on it's head. The gravy train will stop for a great many people inside the beltway, which is why you see people like Chris Matthews frantically suggest Sanders would bring about Communist Death Squads in Central Park. They will continue to milk the cow if Trump gets re-elected so of course they would prefer that outcome.

And to touch back on the Culinary Union for another moment. One union being able to scrape together healthcare for their membership is not itself an argument against Medicare for All. It's a non-starter. And that's presuming the statement is coming from a politically agnostic place, which it's not.

I pictured you reading this while cosplaying as Che Guevara...

I used to be with "it", but then they changed what "it" was. Now, what I'm with isn't "it", and what's "it" seems weird and scary to me. -Grandpa Simpson

There’s nothing singlehanded about it. Sanders is the figurehead of a political movement that has grown well beyond a single person, and will continue after he’s gone. That’s why he’s exciting to people.

Who said anything about a centrist? My own issue comes from my cynical read on humans. I recall the country flipping the fuck out when the ACA was enacted, even though it was already a compromise bill. I worry that Sanders wouldn't have or be able to maintain the political capital necessary to institute these things. That leads to rising anger from the right (which you'd get anyway, so fuck 'em), and possible disillusionment on the left.

Nothing seems to scare people more than when politicians do the things they said they would.

ETA: I do not intend any of this as Anti Sanders. I hope he can pull it off. I really do. It's the fickleness of the average American that pisses me off.

Well for one thing, the left wing is going to clean house at the DNC. All the influence peddling that happens in the upper halls of power inside the Democratic Party will be turned on it's head. The gravy train will stop for a great many people inside the beltway, which is why you see people like Chris Matthews frantically suggest Sanders would bring about Communist Death Squads in Central Park. They will continue to milk the cow if Trump gets re-elected so of course they would prefer that outcome.

And to touch back on the Culinary Union for another moment. One union being able to scrape together healthcare for their membership is not itself an argument against Medicare for All. It's a non-starter. And that's presuming the statement is coming from a politically agnostic place, which it's not.

What you describe w/ the DNC is not within the powers of the President.

As for the union: I agree that their excellent health care does not invalidate the need for universal health care. My point is that this is a union that would prefer a different Democratic candidate, but would also likely prefer Sanders to Trump. Making a complete enemy of them now is discarding a potential future ally in the fight that matters most. It's dumb politics.

(02-13-2020, 01:52 PM)Amos Wrote: There’s nothing singlehanded about it. Sanders is the figurehead of a political movement that has grown well beyond a single person, and will continue after he’s gone. That’s why he’s exciting to people.

And that's why I'm voting for Warren. The Progressive movement needs accomplishments, or it will die in its infancy. If a progressive President spends their entire term fighting with Democrats, they will accomplish nothing and set their movement back. The country is nudged to the left when progressive policies pass and work, like the ACA.

The person who gave universal health care its best chance of actually happening in the future was not Sanders; it was Nancy Pelosi, by pushing the ACA through when everyone else had left it for dead. The same Pelosi who was one of the first members of the Progressive caucus. The same Pelosi that most Sanders supporters now deride as a centrist because she tries to actually pass legislation instead of making enemies out of allies.

I'm less excited by people who proclaim how the world should be than I am people who actually move the real world in that direction.

It’s not that Bernie has the highest IQ, it’s that ~25% of his base isn’t going to vote for anyone else. Bernie beats Trump - you can’t comfortably say that about anyone else without admitting Sanders is in an inherently stronger position.

It shouldn’t come as a shock that certain people make policy the condition of their support opposed to if someone is a Democrat or not.